I haven't felt the urge to post lately...busy with all sorts of things in my life...school being the primary one. But this story has brought me out of my slumber.
Question for conservatives: WHAT THE FUCK IS THE MATTER WITH YOU?!!!???
Seriously, your paranoia and psychosis is officially limitless. President Obama wants to address the students of this nation on the importance of hard work and staying in school. And you are "absolutely appalled that taxpayer dollars are being used to spread President Obama's socialist ideology?" To put it simply, you are collection of asshats.
You complain about our schools not doing a good enough job educating children...the lack of motivation and inspiration...and yet your maniacal fervor won't even allow President Obama to deliver a simple message of on the significance of education. Do you seriously have a governor of a sitting state (Rick Perry, Texas) telling children to stay home from school that day?
I didn't think it was possible for me to be angrier than I was during the W years but I got news for all of you...I am. So, the gloves are off, folks. There won't be anymore polite debating and "trying to see all angles." As of right now, I am finished trying to be fair with you people. And it is YOUR fault. I am sick of trying to pretend otherwise. You aren't part of any sort of solution at all. You exist only to tap into your inner rage and try to fuck things up for this country. You are the problem.
For me to pretend otherwise any longer is insanity.
23 comments:
Hallelujah..it's about time. Mark, I'm glad to see that you have finally come around.
The word "fair" is not in the fucking vocabulary of the right wing of this country. The primary purpose of their existence these days is to destroy. Now, how do you stop a group of people like that? If I thought like them, I would advocate liquidation:)
Since I am not psychotic, my solution is to hit them where they place significance in their lives: their pocketbook. Call every advertiser that pushes their wares on Glenn Beck, Rush etc and tell them you are not going to buy their product. And you are going to get 100 friends to not buy their product. Get 100 friends to do so and show these companies proof that you have done it. Glenn Beck has lost over 30 advertisers in the last month since he called President Obama a racist.
Let the people with money who want to sell you something know that you won't support an ideology that is against touting the importance of education.
Anyone mention to nut ball land that the speech was entirely voluntary depending upon what each school wanted to do?
Nah, didn't think so. Please place your aluminum foil hats back on your heads and scream about socialism while pushing around your filthy grocery cart full of pop cans.
I agree!!
Yep, this one pretty much takes the cake. I am interested to see the text of the speech so we can see exactly what conservatives are now against their children seeing.
Sara,
I am interested to see the text of the speech so we can see exactly what conservatives are now against their children seeing.
So are we.
Actually, most sane people don't expect the speech itself to be too bad. (Never mind the less sane ones…) The thing that got people upset was a line in the supplemental teachers' materials directing them to have their students "write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president."
Not the country. The president.
Now, I personally don't expect this to be a large problem; kids get cynical real fast if you try to pull this kind of thing. But it illuminates a disturbing tendency in President Obama's style. I'll let the renowned political scientist Juan Linz explain the general syndrome.
Cheers!
This is no different from anything certain conservatives have been doing for years.
Before it was "If you don't support the president in a time of war you're a traitor to this country." Now that Obama is the president in a time of war it's "Obama is a socialist and we have to do anything to stop him."
With these guys it's always been about political machinations. They're willing to let the whole country burn down to beat Obama. That's why they are so dead-set against his health care initiative: they know it will work, they know it will make life better, and they know it will make the majority of people happier and safer.
And, as we all know, the basic tenets of right-wing political doctrine are to attack your enemies with any kind of accusation -- true or not, deny them any successes, never admit error and characterize their every belief and action as some ominous indicator of darker motives.
This is why they oppose action on issues that obviously need to be addressed, such as global warming and health care. To admit that the Democrats are right about any one single thing is tantamount to total capitulation. This "opposition politics" is why they got almost everything wrong during the Bush years. The Republicans have been hemmed in by the ideologues, forced to oppose anything the Democrats believe, no matter how reasonable, in order to deny them any legitimacy whatsoever.
While the Democrats oppose certain Republican initiatives, they are much more likely to compromise to make the country work. Ted Kennedy, for one, often worked across the aisle. Bill Clinton bought into Republican calls for welfare reform. But it was the Republicans who shut government down during the Clinton years, in part because Newt Gingrich was in a snit about his seating assignment on Air Force I.
When Republicans these days try to reach a compromise with Democrats they are labeled RINOs, reviled as traitors and threatened with expulsion from the party.
This kind of destructive politics is disastrous for the nation, and ultimately will destroy the Republican party.
Mark got into trouble over at TSM for supposedly passing off a comment on Amazon about Thomas Frank's new book "The Wrecking Crew" as his own. Clearly, he didn't.
I went to check out the link with the comment and found this which jibes with what you say, blk.
"Regrettably, one side of the battle continues to play the game as politics, as elections won or lost and citizens swayed or not, while the other side approaches it as an act of war, a no-holds-barred contest in which the only goal is the complete and utter destruction of the other side."
What do you say, conservatives? Is that a fair assessment of your side?
I know that happiness and safety are what I look at when it comes to health care. Numbers be damned...people need to feel happy. Happy happy, joy joy.
I don't oppose health care reform, I oppose the specific health care bill that "your side" is trying to pass.
I don't oppose global warming, I oppose the specific cap and trade bill "your side" passed in the house. Why don't you tell us what is so great about the Waxman-Markey cap and trade bill?
Bruce, Republican opposition doesn't mean a whole lot when Democrats have a veto-proof majority, unless Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh are brainwashing the masses...but I read on here that nobody is listening to them anymore so that can't be true.
1. The Liberal wing of the Democrat party spent the last 7 years shouting to the world that "Bush lied." This in spite of the fact that the intelligence agencies of Germany, the UK and Israel all agreed with his information. This in spite of the fact that President Clinton's intel assessments agreed with his information, right up through the end of 2000. This in spite of the fact that the majority of Democrats in Congress, including Sen. Hillary Clinton, agreed with his information. But no, Bush and Cheney, no one else, lied.
The world has had to hear that shit for 7 long years. You know it's a flat-out lie, yet it's still being said. A liberal Democrat is the last person on Earth with room to accuse anyone of "paranoia" and "psychosis".
2. a) I was before single-payer before I was against it. b) The stimulus is supposed to "jump-start the economy", but isn't supposed to stimulate it. c) I want an "open and honest debate" about a bill that I demand gets passed before anyone has a chance to read it. d) There will be no lobbyists in my administration, except for nearly all of them. e) My administration will be the most accountable and transparent in history. But over half my cabinet will be "czars" who bypass Senate vetting, and I'll try to pressure the CBO (among others) to lie to make me look good.
Rather than go through the rest of the alphabet, let's just say that anyone who thinks this administration actually means anything it says is so disconnected from reality as to be insane.
3. This is the guy who said national service should be "required of students"... until someone pitched a bitch. This is the same guy whose speech was slated to include asking students to "write letters to themselves about what they can to to help the President"... until someone pitched a bitch.
4. We already have examples of Obama's followers pressuring schoolchildren, intimidating voters, doing their best to destroy private citizens' lives because they dared disagree with him, assaulting and even maiming dissenters, deliberately distorting the news (MSNBC's "armed redneck racists" bit), and flatly lying (Greenpeace's claim of arctic ice being melted by 2030). Further, we have plenty of examples of Obama saying nothing in response to such distortions, lies and political machine tactics. Hardly surprising, since they are the very tactics he likes to employ himself, as in the case of Honduras. "Bloody hands at arm's length" are typical of this administration so far. Even if his personal intent is not propaganda (a doubtful contention at best), he can count on many, many schoolteachers using it as a propaganda opportunity, and both he and you know it.
The bottom line is that no, it does not mean Obama is trying to indoctrinate schoolkids. But by now it's obvious that if you aren't suspicious of anything this President says or does, you're not paying attention, probably intentionally so.
That's why they are so dead-set against his health care initiative: they know it will work, they know it will make life better, and they know it will make the majority of people happier and safer.
Ah, I see. So the fact that the Democrat's flatly refuse to consider any type of tort reform, even though it's 10% of healthcare costs, doesn't mean anything. The fact that the Democrats flatly refuse to insert language into the bill preventing your taxes from paying for other people's abortions doesn't mean anything. The fact that the Democrats flatly refuse to insert language into the bill saying doctors will verify patients' citizenship status before sticking the taxpayers with the bill doesn't mean anything.
You've just declared to the world that there's no point in discussing anything with you, because you don't give a shit what the actual facts are.
Mastiff, what exactly is wrong about helping the president? I find it interesting that conservatives bemoan a loss of traditional values and yet if this was presented during WWII, for example, or during the Kennedy era, people would think helping the president is a patriotic thing to do. Of course, we have about 30 million people in this country that think that Barack Obama is a demon...literally...so
GOF,
1. They did lie. And the cowards on the left went along with it. It's no different than what happened during Vietnam.
2. That's an exaggeration. I'm always surprised at how Obama is viewed as if he was W. Not even close and you know it.
3. See my above comment on helping the president. And doesn't the right support mandated military service? Seems to me I heard Hannity et all saying that young kids should do 2 years in the military like they do in Israel. Why is it bad if the service is rebuilding a park, for example?
4. Ok, now you are whirring out of control. Dude, c'mon. I know you are much more intelligent than to spit Palin-esque lines out.
As far as your last comments regarding facts,
The House Energy and Commerce Committee adopted an amendment, proposed by Rep. Lois Capps (D-Calif.), that would prohibit taxpayer dollars from funding abortions. The amendment would not allow the federal government to either require or prohibit abortion coverage by private insurers.
http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090730/hr3200_capps_1.pdf
And
H.R. 3200: Sec 246 — NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS: Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.
Also, under current law, those in the country illegally don’t qualify for federal health programs. Of interest: About half of illegal immigrants have health insurance now, according to the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center, which says those who lack insurance do so principally because their employers don’t offer it.
"Mastiff, what exactly is wrong about helping the president?"
That question without context is a valid one. Unfortunately, we have a president who promotes policies that are the antithesis of everything America stands for. That is why the question brought forth by you in the context of Obama is answer with "Everything!"
We don't want to help the president enact his economy destroying policies, retarded foreign policy, or any of his social reconstruction at the point of a gun. Not with him or anyone.
"are the antithesis of everything America stands for."
in your opinion. So, what exactly does America stand for? I think your answer will pretty much detail why the right is having so much trouble with President Obama.
"enact his economy destroying policies"
Really?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/31/business/economy/31taxpayer.html?_r=1&scp=3&sq=Banks%20pay%20back%20with%20interest&st=cse
And this one is sure to a shovel to the head stunner for you...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125185379218478087.html
Not the Journal...say it ain't so, Rupert!
"retarded foreign policy"
Would that be his INCREASE of troop levels in AfPak...now to probably go over 80K? A foreign policy which is now largely being supported by the right and not the left.
"his social reconstruction at the point of a gun"
Define this. I'd like to see if it means more than "I don't get to be a bigoted dickhead anymore."
1. Okay, so you're asserting that a) the 500 tons of yellowcake uranium were just a coincidence, and b) the largely desert country of Iraq has such an incredible insect problem as to require thousands of tons of pesticides stored in military facilities, yes those were for peaceful civilian purposes, and c) the same guy you've said for 8 years was the stupidest President in the history of the Republic, who lost the respect of the entire world, was so brilliant and persuasive that he got four major intelligence services and his predecessor in office of the opposing party to agree on a lie for years in order to get the war he wanted.
And you accuse others of paranoid psychoses?
2.
a.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndStT6c93rc&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fhotair.com%2Farchives%2F2009%2F08%2F19%2Fvideo-single-payer-is-the-goal%2F&feature=player_embedded#t=118
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpAyan1fXCE&feature=related
http://www.examiner.com/x-6572-NY-Obama-Administration-Examiner~y2009m8d27-Will-Ted-Kennedys-death-insure-health-care-passage
Note paragraphs 8 & 9.
b.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28538966/
http://thepage.time.com/full-remarks-of-obamas-stimulus-speech/
Note the phrase "immediately jumpstart job creation and long-term growth".
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/07/should-they-have-called-it-the-stabilization-act.html
c.
http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/remember_when_obama_promised_an_open_transparent_debate_about_health_care/
Follow the links.
d.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/ExecutiveOrder-EthicsCommitments/
http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/20471.asp
Note that... he waivered his own promise seventeen times just in the first two weeks.
e.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/TransparencyandOpenGovernment/
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/mar/05/nation/na-obama-czars5
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/07/26/white-house-cbo-overstepped-in-its-analysis-of-proposed-medicare-board/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/32024252#32024252
Okay, so I can't prove the purpose of the meeting was to pressure them into lying for him. All I can prove is that when the CBO's numbers disagreed with those of his own OMB, he bypassed Congress to call in the Director of the Congressional budget office.
So okay, there's one piece of all that that could possibly be an exaggeration.
[Continued...]
3. And doesn't the right support mandated military service?
Not the vast majority of it that I know of, no. Perhaps you did hear Hannity say such a thing, I don't know cos I don't listen to him. Conscription is conscription, regardless of its purpose. Regardless, since he has openly supported mandatory service, thinking it's possible he'd think it's okay to require it in this instance as well hardly qualifies as paranoia, huh?
4. Obama's followers:
Pressuring schoolchildren:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDEAYgm0Dv8&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.belch.com%2Fblog%2F2008%2F11%2F06%2Freason-142-to-homeschool-obama-teachers-wont-bully-kids-who-support-mccain%2F&feature=player_embedded
"Oh Jesus, John McCain."
Voter intimidation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neGbKHyGuHU&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94b78rnWMP4&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fhotair.com%2Farchives%2F2008%2F11%2F04%2Ffox-black-panther-poll-intimidation-in-pennsylvania%2F&feature=player_embedded
Attempting to destroy someone's life because he publicly disagreed? Sheesh, google "Joe the Plumber".
Assaulting dissenters:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E08CjYFS8MU&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fhotair.com%2Farchives%2F2009%2F08%2F07%2Fvideo-protester-beaten-by-union-goons-at-town-hall-speaks-update-seiu-releases-attack-ad-a&feature=player_embedded
http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2009/09/health-reform-opponents-finger-bitten-off-.html
Deliberately distorting a news report:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYKQJ4-N7LI&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fhotair.com%2Farchives%2F2009%2F08%2F19%2Funreal-msnbc-edits-clip-of-man-with-gun-at-obama-rally-to-support-racism-narrative%2F&feature=player_embedded
That's a black man with the gun slung on his shoulder.... but no, it's all about white racism... that's why you don't get to see his face.
Lying about "No Arctic Ice by 2030":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NC7bE9jopXE&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fhotair.com%2Farchives%2F2009%2F08%2F20%2Fgreenpeace-yeah-we-lied-but-we-needed-the-emotionalism%2F&feature=player_embedded
Have we heard even so much as "Ya know, you idiots are not helping!" from the President?
[Cue crickets.]
No, in fact we've seen the exact same tactics.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090806/pl_politico/25891
Note that the next day, Ken Gladney was beaten by an SEIU thug. Are you seriously going to suggest that Obama, who was elected for his superlative judgment, is so out of touch he couldn't foresee that result, given the long and violent history of union "activism"?
I call bullshit.
And finally...
The House Energy and Commerce Committee adopted an amendment, proposed by Rep. Lois Capps (D-Calif.)...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090805/ap_on_go_co/us_health_care_overhaul_abortion
But in fairness, I'll grant you they didn't flatly refuse. It may be a bookkeeping trick, an "end run" around the issue, but it's not a flat refusal.
H.R. 3200: Sec 246 — NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS: Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.
It'll be nice to see if that survives to the final version. But even assuming it does, please note that your response does not address what I said:
"the Democrats flatly refuse to insert language into the bill saying doctors will verify patients' citizenship status before sticking the taxpayers with the bill."
Yeah, okay, it's "not allowed". But there is no provision to actually enforce what is "not allowed", and the Democrats refuse to add one.
And of course, you completely ignored the biggest part of it, which is the Democrat party flatly refusing to countenance any form of tort reform at all. That could shave 10% off the cost of healthcare for an investment of zero, yet they have no interest in it whatsoever.
Please understand, I'd be okay with healthcare reform that was actual healthcare reform. But a bill with so many flaws, sponsored and pushed by people who simply will not address the single largest flaw (tort reform), relentlessly fear-mongered (see unnecessary amputations for higher fees, unnecessary tonsillectomies for higher fees) by someone who insisted that it had to be passed right now, before it was even read... that's not "reform", and you know it. That's either 1) a power grab, 2) a bennie tossed to supporters (like the trial lawyers don't freaking own the party) or, most likely, 3) both.
And given all that, you claim that for people to be suspicious of someone who has earned their suspicions many times over is "paranoid psychosis."
Shyeah.
Mark,
Mastiff, what exactly is wrong about helping the president?
Clearly, you didn't bother to read the article by Linz. Briefly, one key difference between a parliamentary system and a presidential system is that a prime minister may lead the government, but he is not the head of state. He represents the political apparatus of the ruling party, not the country as a whole.
A president, meanwhile, is both a political figure representing his party and engaging in political battles, and a representative of the country as a whole. There is an uneasy tension here.
Worst case, as Linz documents in several Latin American countries, a president can confuse political opposition with lack of national loyalty, and believe that he alone represents the people—and therefore that anyone who opposes him is by definition a traitor.
This conflation of a president's own partisan political goals with the national will is the recurring danger of the presidential system. While many American presidents have indulged in such dangerous rhetoric from time to time, President Obama seems to be doing so more frequently than most, and earlier as well.
This is what is wrong with asking children to "help the president." Children in school should be excluded from politicking. To preserve that exclusion, the educational supplement should have avoided even the possibility of a partisan interpretation, and asked children to "help the country" if anything at all.
If you want the actual answer to the question that prompted this comment thread.... this guy has probably articulated it as well as anyone:
http://townhall.com/columnists/AustinHill/2009/09/06/obama_offends_-_and_doesnt_seem_to_know_it
"The Department of Education should not be producing paid political advertising for the president, it should be helping us to produce smarter students."
Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.)House Majority leader in 1991 on Bush 1's speech to students.
Well, we've seen the president speak today..perhaps you can tell me how exactly telling your kids to stay in school, work hard, and take responsibility for themselves is a paid political advertisement?
Grumpy,
Regarding your above points...
Was the yellow cake uranium from before or after the first Gulf War? What sort of condition was it in?
Also, if these discoveries (yellow cake and pesticides) were as dangerous as you say, why did the entire Bush administration say that there were no WMDs..admitting their error? Wouldn't they trot them out and say, "See?"
But Mastiff, that's the difference between you and I. When President Obama asks children to help the president, you see Hugo Chavez. I see Jack Kennedy.
I read the article and get the main gist of it but I don't think it applies here. I wonder if your comments would still be made and how they would be taken in the months after 9-11 when all of us (including me) wanted to come up with ways to help the president. For me, it was after he demonstrated quite clearly that his own self interest was more important than the country's safety, that I lost my desire to support him.
You're missing the point, Mark.
I'm not saying the intel was dead on the money. I'm not saying it wasn't or isn't a mess. I'm saying that if it's "intel", good, bad or indifferent, when the UK, Germany, Israel, and the CIA under Bill Clinton all say it, it's still intel when George W. Bush says it.
The yellowcake and the pesticides only demonstrate that there was valid reason for those intel estimates, not that the conclusions drawn were necessarily correct.
And if you're one of those who can somehow claim that "intel" morphed into "lie" when Bush took the oath of office, you have no room to call anyone else "paranoid".
Post a Comment